Current architecture of LLMs focus mainly on the retrieval part and the weights learned are just converged to get best outcome for next token prediction. Whereas, ability to put this data into a logical system should also have been a training goal IMO. Next token prediction + Formal Verification of knowledge during training phase itself = that would give LLM ability to keep consistency in it's knowledge generation and see the right hallucinations (which I like to call imagination)
The process can look like-
1. Use existing large models to convert the same previous dataset they were trained on into formal logical relationships. Let them generate multiple solutions
2. Take this enriched dataset and train a new LLM which not only outputs next token but also a the formal relationships between previous knowledge and the new generated text
3. Network can optimize weights until the generated formal code get high accuracy on proof checker along with the token generation accuracy function
In my own mind I feel language is secondary - it's not the base of my intelligence. Base seems more like a dreamy simulation where things are consistent with each other and language is just what i use to describe it.
The process can look like-
1. Use existing large models to convert the same previous dataset they were trained on into formal logical relationships. Let them generate multiple solutions
2. Take this enriched dataset and train a new LLM which not only outputs next token but also a the formal relationships between previous knowledge and the new generated text
3. Network can optimize weights until the generated formal code get high accuracy on proof checker along with the token generation accuracy function
In my own mind I feel language is secondary - it's not the base of my intelligence. Base seems more like a dreamy simulation where things are consistent with each other and language is just what i use to describe it.